NRC FORM 464 Part I . U.S. NUCLEAR REGULA TORY COMMISSION NRC RESPONSE NUMBER (04-2018)

1 201s-00032s 11

1 RESPONSE TO FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA) REQUEST RESPONSE

TYPE D INTERIM I ./ I FINAL

REQUESTER: DATE:

jPeter Melzer 11 041191201s

DESCRIPTION OF REQUESTED RECORDS:

Access to ABC inspection report 70-903, written with respect to the Gulf-United Nuclear Carp's mixed oxide fuel facility on Nuclear Lake in Pawling, NY.

0

0 D D D

D

D D

D

PART I. --INFORMATION RELEASED

The NRC has made some, or all, of the requested records publicly available through one or more of the following means: (1) https://www.nrc.gov; (2) public ADAMS, https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html; (3) microfiche available in the NRC Public Document Room; or FOIA Online, https://foiaonline.regulations.gov/foia/action/public/home.

Agency records subject to the request are enclosed.

Records subject to the request that contain information originated by or of interest to another Federal agency have been referred to that agency (See Part I.D -- Comments) for a disclosure determination and direct response to you.

We are continuing to process your request.

See Part I.D -- Comments.

AMOUNT

$0.00

PART I.A -- FEES

D You will be billed by NRC for the amount indicated.

D You will receive a refund for the amount indicated.

D Fees waived.

0 D

Since the minimum fee threshold was not met, you will not be charged fees.

Due to our delayed response, you will not be charged fees.

PART 1.8--INFORMATION NOT LOCATED OR WITHHELD FROM.DISCLOSURE

We did not locate any agency records responsive to your request. Note: Agencies may treat three discrete categories of law enforcement and national security records as not subject to the FOIA ("exclusions"). See 5 U.S.C. 552(c). This is a standard notification given to all requesters; it should not be taken to mean that any excluded records do, or do not, exist.

We have withheld certain information pursuant to the FOIA exemptions described, and for the reasons stated, in Part II.

Because this is an interim response to your request, you may not appeal at this time. We will notify you of your right to appeal any of the responses we have issued in response to your request when we issue our final determination.

You may appeal this final determination within 90 calendar days of the date of this response. If you submit an appeal by mail, address it to the FOIA Officer, at U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Mail $top T-2 F43, Washington, D.C. 20555-0001. You may submit an appeal by e-mail to FOIA.resource@nrc.gov. You may fax an appeal to (301) 415-5130. Or you may submit an appeal through FOIA Online, https://foiaonline.regulations.gov/foia/action/public/home. Please be sure to include on your submission that it is a "FOIA Appeal." .

PART 1.C -- REFERENCES AND POINTS OF CONTACT

You have the right to seek assistance from the NRC's FOIA Public Liaison by submitting your inquiry at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/ foia/contact-foia.html, or by calling the FOIA Public Liaison at (301) 415-1276.

If we have denied your request, you have the right to seek dispute resolution services from the NRC's Public Liaison or the Office of Government Information Services (OGIS). To seek dispute resolution services from OGIS, you may e-mail OGIS at ogis@nara.gov, send a fax to (202) 7 41-5789, or send a letter to: Office of Government Information Services, National Archives and Records Administration, 8601 Adelphi Road, College Park, MD 20740-6001. For additional information about OGIS, please visit the OGIS website at https://www.archives.gov/ogis.

NRC FORM 464 Part I (04-2018)

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULA TORY COMMISSION

RESPONSE TO FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA) REQUEST

PART I.D -- COMMENTS

NRC RESPONSE NUMBER

1 2018-000325 11 1

RE~~~SE D INTERIM J ./ I FINAL

The records, in accordance with your request, are enclosed. They are only recorded on aging microfiche, which can produce a lesser quality. However, we have provided you with the best copies we could find.

Signature - Freedom of Information Act Officer or Designee

Stephanie A. Blaney ,/

r Digitally signed by Stephanie A. Blaney 1 --sate: 2018.04.19 11 :48: 13 -04'00'

. t

I·

APR 241974 ®-''' tii,i-Gul! ~ucloar J.;ei. Cai&p&DJ Att.ut:loa? Mr. Peter toy•a

Ku.ssor

Licen•e Nos. SJ;S-871 ... 49

letuI.atOl'J' AdD:lnif,ratSoa. Craselcu:ad• l?oad tlmmford. Ne.r !ork 10523

CX··2S 1~a~uct1o~ No•. 10 903/74-01

50 101/'14 02 50 290/76 02

C..atln:n-

TMe refrr• to tlae !upcctf_on conchacte.4 1)7 Kr. Jermn of tbla office w April 9· 11 ucl 15-16. 1974 at l'cvU.na, J:ev York. of activU:lu aisthorlae.4 b:, AJ:C Llcaue Hoa. S>."!C· 871. ll-49 ud CX-25 an4_ to the &!lscu•dou of ou fia.d!Ds• held by Jfr. Jaua vitb Mr. Weraea of ,our staff at tllll ccmcluslon of the tu~ecttoa. an4 to w1'11equcnt tel.Gphoa& diocuesion• betvc.= !k. Je;n:aan and Hr. Anduam oa. April 17 ~ 1974.

Area aesinccl 4arlD& tbb 1a•J>Qction an dceicr1bad 1n the lagulatory Operat.1.Gu Iuepecttoa 'leport vb.kb la enclosed vf.th t'!lle l•tt~. lil~hin tht•• areas. the hllf,ec.tlon ccm.sd•ted of Aloctlve Gm1nAt1ous of proceduru and rcpreautatlYe reeordm, :mtcrvlov1 with JWl-1'~.i. 111i,oe111'aent.e wcle 'b7 tbe h&,i'Q:c.toq •• oba•n•tf.on• b,1 the f.na~tol'S'.

Tbs effort of thl• :lnapectioG •• to ut111>U~ the validity of tba 11UrYe7 reports euhwUt:ed vlth letta• froa r. l.nyan IIIAte:1 1"•rch 11 and Y.rc:b ll. 1974. !h-=ae Jetter• abated that. baaed on t!ill reports. bu11d1ua• allCl faclU.tl«tA foraorly hmlsf.us two tQSt rea~tor1 ual a fw.• fa'brkatiaa opcratiao. ha.4 bcu clecont.uJ.."ULted to l«ela •peeUle4 b7 th• Dlrcctor•t• of Liceaat»s: u acc:epta!::1e for aaarea:tricterJ UM. Hao:, r&DC!ea checks mdca by the inspector• confln.cr! the vaU41tJ of these report••

Ia aecor~..a v1t1l Scc:tloa t. 790 .t the AEC' • · ll'11e• c-f fracttcc·', l'tll't 2, Tlt1• 10, Co4e. of Fel~al t.esul&tloue. • copy ot thill letter .aed tbtl eiaclo!Jed !nspi1tctf.o&I raport vill lua plac6Cl 1D. the AtC"• lublf.e l>ocvrsent Jloola. If tld• report coa,t..Ai:ls arr, i11fo~.aticm that 7oa (or 7cmr eontractor) ltel1eva to k proprictDr1, it 1a 1aecea111:l'J' that :,,oa mi.e a 11:ri~t.n ap .. 11ution ,ritb1n 20 clsys to this off lee to vltllbold such f:.fol'P'l&t!on fra.: pu't,U.c discloe;w:e, l.ny ncb applic.At.loa naoc iuelud• a lull •tat6'fl&:rtt cf ths rH&ema on tbe t.uS... of wJ,S.CI~ it is clabeJ tJast tlui. f:2for.1.!!.tio:1 is rroprie tuy. al\d •bwld Le p:erarcd so t.'ha t provriet~rr b{onatloa: U.en't111e& in tlu: =.p;,U.cntl.o2 b c.or..1ta1nt-.4 ill a

CltSS J~/JAS

4-23 74 CAPUTOli

sooa110 .•. s a.to ' ,· . .

:Ulf ?wclur Fuel.a -AlPU'/ . •· 2-

•epante par& of the~.··· U we a 11ot boar frm JOII D tbla regar4 vt.ctda tbe •pacUlecl period.. tba report '11111 ~• placd SD th• l'ubl!c Docullleat boa.

Bo l'epl.J e:o t1d• letcer la requlre4, IM»voer • abou14 Jaa 1'avo .,,, questiou eom:ft'llfna thla lupoctloa~ .,. '1111 l,e ,1.... to cllacaa• thawtth ,-. .-1

"•• • I ... ~

Paul L l1iboa. a:.lef Jta4!o1o&1cal anal bv1ro,mir.1tol hotectln. Branck

Enclosure. 1.0 Iupec1:ioa lcJ'ort llo8.7C>-90J/74-01

50-101/74 ··02 .50-290/14-0Z

cc~ Hr. F. G. Steqge1., Vlca l'rasWn& lbCDf&ctarilra

bee: (w/encla) IO Chief. lS&EI llO:IIQ (5) DL (4)plus 9 add'l cys of report RO lilN L:D/D for Fuela allll Mat'• :{sjntral Filea . l'Dl Local 1'1)1.

NSIC DTII State of lev 1'ork

,r,11 .... 1n')· I I ....

'

·, -·

-,.· -....

!01 ru.

Culf •~lear fuel.I at. favllq. '1. T.

Ueeua Xoa. SHH-871 Jl-41

CX-25

Docbt Hos. 70.903 SC.-101 S0-290

,i .. · . tf~· -·-· ..

APR 211974

'l'he Critical PaciUt:7 bou.S.91 the tw test reacton vaa a11ne1•• OIi 4/10/74. The r .. ctore ha4 bema cm.pletel:, NDOYe4. The coatnl equlpaat •• at!U in place. R'o ntdence of eontmdnatlom vu obMned ta the fad.11&:,.

nae lover levele of the Platod.11111 Faeillc, ad lta •up.,ordq t.a1141a19 were •urveyd 4/9-11/74. Tb• only, co11tamhaat1011 foulMI abn• the nlea,e cdterla level• vu aerable c.oat.aabatloa lull'I• three ••ctloa of conduit la tit.a vall batva&A the PUot Area au4 the Veld arid toa4 Aru. fte wipe •hon4 20~dJ111 alpba.

The upper 1nm of the PlutoDf.1111 l'aclltt, wr• aurnyed 4/15-16/74. Ona eect1011 of tu wt va11 of the Ca Bouae ahove4 flzecl contafnattoa lenla exceediq SO()dpa alpha per 10.KZ. Ille vall vas elew4 b:, tbe llcwt•'• eo11tractor peraomael to a •••o of lea• daa SOOdpa alpha per lQH& and • IIAdlna of aboat lOOOdpa u ecarn.1•• l,J tbe BC fll•p•cton.. It vu note4 thac the thru ••ctlou of conclutt W l,ea rmoye4 fna the vall htw• the Pilot Ana aad the V•l• awl l.ca4 area. tt •u alff ute4 tbat two a4• ditf.onal aecttona of condalt pmaatrate4 thl• vall. fteJ .,n wtl"l4 And th• v1pa &bond llSc.lpm. A '.lcensee npnautatlve phoaed IOal 011 4/11/74 and atated tut thue hO aect!ou of CODC1alt bad been rallOTed fna the vall.

0a 4/18/74 ,. ,. lnapp DOtlf1e4 L z. Duba. P11A1 Facility Lteana1. HQ ., phone that PlutoldUII facllltJ aat tJae reluaa criteria. lie also notlfla• P. a. Erlcuoa. laac:tor J.tcnatag, nq. that t!ae Crltlcal FacUt~, act ta· rel.ease crlt.eda.

Pbtlllp c • .J'ema11 ladlatloa Specialist

s•

. r, ~ t .-. -~ ....

I '

Si ii

:

t ...

I

.. o#

P. J. Enapp, Senior. Fac:lllt7 ID4lologtca1 rrotectln Sectloa

J.BSPECTO! EV.&LUUI.OI ~lhacl.ai rud.ieoa,.., Pavlbc, llo tort t.kaae lloe. ID 871 ll· 4t, ex 2J

R 24 1974

thla va• a d.oae OIIC au.ney. It appeaTe4 tha& a goo4 Jo'b vaa ••• by Calf amt 1, Atcor, Ine. Sa •ec:oa.tadu.tla& tlaa fluta:dua l'ac:lllty. The faclllt7 vu &l'O&al7 contmdnateal l,7 aa up1oal.DD !a a Pia stna In la Deceaber, 1972.. 'l'be 4econt·mn111atlma vu a aaJor jolt refl\llr!aa rci:tOYal an4 rcplaceac:nt of ins.14a nil 011ts1de. wall.a.

There vu DO Wlcatln of &DY contaudJ:latlora a1'ne l>ackgrouD4 1a the Critical FectlltJ whlcb bo:aaol the tvo tut reactor•.

('

NJ.lip c. Jena• 1aatatima Speciallat

, .. , . ~

I I

...

.... ·*

RO Inspection Report No:

U. S, ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION

DIRECTORATE OF REGUL.\TORY OPERATIONS

REGION I 70-903/74-01 50-101/74-02 50-290/74-02

Licensee: Gulf Nuclear Fuels Corporation

Grassland Road

Elmsford, New York 10523

Location: Pawling, New York ,·

70-903 50-101

Docket No: 50-290 SIDI 871

License No: R-49 ------CX-25 Priority: l --------Category: (A 1)._G __ _

Type of Licensee: Fuel Fabrication and ·Research and Test Reactor Operation

Type of Inspection:Announced Clpse Out Inspection .

Dates of Inspection: April 9-11 and 15-16, 1974 .

Dates of Previous Inspection: November 26-28, 1973

Reporting Inspect:-:~ ... ~:~ ... _ ~ f?.._ . ~ \

~~ip ~~ ~rma~, Radiati~n Specialist

Accompanying Inspectors:--...., -a.~~._ ~

:l. .. ,l.~. 7 a.! Date

q. J.'I- 7., \• ~ April 15 & 16, 1974 P. J. Knapp, Senior, Facilities Date

Radiological Protection Branch

Date

Date

• Date

Other Accompanying Personnel: None Date

'-l-J..!-11l Date:

,---~- . /

Reviewed By: ~. ~ ~--- • • • I ·,. P.J. Knapp, Senior

Facilities Radiological Protection Section • ·r, i 1

r; .~ r ..

8oua110 , .

- f

'·

...

.. ..

Enforcement Action

A... Violations

None

B. Safety Items

· None

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

License Action on Previouslx Identified Enforcement IteJDs

Not applicable

Unusual Occurrences

None

Other Significant Findings

A. Current Findings

Atcor, lpcorporated, Peekskill, N.Y. under contract wi.th the licensee, surveyed the licenseJs entire Pawling, N.Y. plant and carried out all work necessary to.reduce contamination levels to below those specified in the, "Guidelines for Decontamination of Facilities and Equipment Prior To Release For Unrestricted Use or Termination of License for Byproduct, Source or Special Nuclear Material," issued by the Directorate of Licensing. Atcor, Inc. holds AEC Byproduct Material License No. 31-11640-01 under which the work was done. The inspection consisted of a radiation survey to verify contamination levels at the plant fa­cilities as reported by the licensee to the AEC in letters dated March ll and 13, 1974. •

The existing contamination levels appeared to meet the Directorate of Licensing guidelines for termination of License Nos. S~-871, R-49 and CX-25.

B. Status of Previously Reported Unresolved Items

None

Management Interview

The following individuals attended the management interview at the conclusion of the inspection on April 16, 1974.

t r, A ·1 I '

""> II , . !·,

..

J.E. Anderson, Plant Manager

Atcor

J. Swiger, President

-2-

R. Levesque, Radiation Protection Officer

AEC

P. J, Knapp P. C. Jerman

The inspectors infonned the Gulf and Atcor representatives that all in­strument surveys and resurveys following necessary decontamination indicated that contamination levels met the Directorate of Licensing guidelines for release of the facilities and that wipes taken would have to be counted at RO:I. On April 17, 1974, P. C. Jerman informed J.E. Anderson that tvo wipes taken inside small diameter pipes which penetrated the wall between two rooms, showed excessive alpha contamination. Later that day, J.E. Anderson in­fonned RO:I that the contaminated items had been removed for disposal.

t ...... ,

I ,

..

REPORT DETAILS

l. Persons Contacted

J.E. Anderson, Gulf, Plant Manager P. Loysen, Gulf, Manager, Regulatory Administration E. C. Holman, Atcor, Vice President, Operations o. Sullivan, Atcor, Project Manager R. Levesque, Atcor, Radiation Protection Ofticer

2. Material Possessed and Processed under the Licenses

a. The Pawling Plutonium Facility operated from 1961 to 1965 under AEC contract. Since 1965, under AEC license the facility had used Pu and U for fuel development work. Early iri the period, the facil­ity included a Gamma Laboratory for studying irradiated fuel material. In December, 1972, an explosion occurred in a Pu glove box which caused significant contamination within the facility. The facility did not resume the manufacture of fuel following the explosion.

b. The Critical Facility had housed the Pawling Lattice Test Rig since 1960 and the Proof Test Facility since 1967. At the time of this inspection the reactors had been completely dismantled and removed from the facility •

... . 3. Instrwnentation

a. Survey meters

1) For the alpha surveys, an Eberline PAClSA, (Serial No. 720) was used. It was calibrated by Brookhaven National Laboratory on March 23. 1974. An Eberline Pu source (Serial No. 6786) which is certified to be 1285 cpm, 2Pi, wa~ used to check the instru­ment.

2) For beta-gamma surveys two Eberline Hodel E-120 GM Meters, with end window probes containing about 2 milligrams/cm2 of absorber, were used. The serial numbers were 1269 and 3174. The two me­ters were calibrated against Co-60 gamma radiation by Brookhaven National Laboratory on January 22, 1974. This calibration would be accurate for most beta-gamma measurements, but would not be accurate for measuring beta radiation from uranium. An instru­ment of the same model was calibrated with beta radiation from natural uranium. In this case it was found that the mR/hr read­ing had to be multiplied by a factor of six or slightly more to obtain true mrad/hr readings from uranium.

Surveys mnde with the E-120 s during this inspection showed no more than 0.05 mR/hr.

l"i ~ ') .. 'I ,_

' . -t .

.;.4_

b. Counting Instruments

Wipes taken over 100cm2 surface area were counted for alpha in an Eberline Model SAC-4. Calibration was accomplished through the use of a certified Pu-239 source. The wipes were also counted in an Eberline Model LCS-1 with an RD-14 Beta Detector. The instrument was calibrated through the use of a certified Sr-90 source.

4. Facilities Surveyed

Figure 1 shows the. location of the buildings at the Pawling site. De­tailed surveys were conducted in the Critical Fa'cility which housed the test reactors, the PlutoniWII Facility where uranium and plutonium fuels were manufactured and the waste pit which reportedly was never used. The two facilities had contained AEC licensed material. Cursory surveys were conducted in the Remote Assembly.Building, Storage Building, Lodge Engineering Building, Mock-up Building and Multiple Failure Building. A license representative stated that these buildings normally did not contain AEC licensed material. However, the Mock-up Building was used for storage of drums containing contaminated waste resulting from the clean-up of the Plutonium Facility. Also, the employee whose person was contaminated with plutonium during the Dec~~ber, 1973 explosion was decontaminated in the Remote Assembly Building.

5. Survey ~esults

a. The Directorate of Licensing guidelines for release. of licensed facilities specify that plutonium total contamination levels may

· not exceed an average of SOOdpm or a maximum of 2500dpm alpha/100 cm2. They also specify that total beta-gamma contamination may not exceed 0.4 mrad/hr at 1cm and removable beta-gamma contamination may not exceed 1000dpm/100c~2.

b. All surveys conducted by the AEC inspectors showed no contamination levels exceeding the guidelines ·except as follow~:

1). One section of the upper level of the east wall in the Gas House of the Plutonium Facility showed an average of about 800dpm/100CJ:12 over 10 square meters. The maximum "as 2000dpm. The wall ,.,as cleaned by the licensee's contractor personnel to an average of less than S00dpm alpha and a maximum of about lOOOdpra as measured by the AEC inspectors.

· 2) Wipes taken inside five sections of ·1.s inch conduit in the wall between the Pilot Area and the Weld and Load Area in the Plutoniu~ Facility showed 200 to 2l5dpm alpha/100cm2. On ~pril 15, 1974 the inspectors observed that three sections had been removed froa the wall. A licensee representative informed RO:I by phone on April 17, 1974 that the other two sections had been removed ,for disposal.

~ r, ~ 1 .. , A q ' I i-

.. ., ....

. .. . . ...

'•

., ... . : .......... ....

• ,1. . . . . . ..... .· ..:· . ~:·\· .. :- .:·. :• ~-. . ·, ,.

. .: •I.

-:. . . • ~r •: • • • . . ...

_______ ..... ,if?O.JS_w!!!-IS. - _. - -

..

..

••• • . ~. ..

.. • .

..

.. ..

• · Fi'gure' ·1

Sketch of rawlin" Pla.nt 0 Layout.

.•

... .. . .. • .. I • • • . ..

.. ....... ... ~ ~ r+.

. ... . . . . ...• ~ ·~­'°~ -..o

..·,· .. ~ • • • •••I ••,:~ ;", ~= •' ,

•

:·J .• ,• • •• , .

"· . . ..

. :

•: . • •

.. . . =~=

. ,\ .

.,. . . . •

-·.

"':} .. .,~ f

I.. ·. 0

.;, .. ~hl "I ,,'.,o.• ',t 6_'

~}!I''.: .,t 'rt"

.­.. ,r ...... •

·• • • Ii ...._\V •.· .,.,-..... : ... f ~ . " •. .,., '· ,,, .. . ': . . . ~. "If ... \ (,'' • -. ~·. -~ •

ii: . . :, .. •. . 141• •• ·J.,::-·.\"(' :. • .,_ .• • . ..,. •· 'l • ._ .. -~ q 1.#-• • • • ,.:·. \"i . . . ·; ) . Ll '' •:,•-· ..

..

'-' .... ·~"·.':r ~- .. ~ it·."· ·.• • ',. !. "\ .,. ...... ,•

• '• r .. '·;.-. ..•;:' : . . ,., . ·. . . . ~' . .,,,.. . ·,,. '-. .~ .· . . ·t ·.

\ .. , •:. ' ·~..:~· '· -~ ·1:~. ~ •.

. ,ft: (. 1<~·· :, Y•" • .;. ."-

poetsr

t,

f "' . \ ,..) ~- r,

l- ., I .

•

'

I,

.,,_ .. •

U.S. ATmlIC ENERGY COMMISSION J

DIRECTORATE OF REGUL.\TORY OPERATIONS

RO Inspection Report No:

REGION I 70-903/74-01 50-101/74-02 50-290/74-02

Licensee: Gulf Nuclear Fuels Corporation

Grassland Road

Elmsford, New York 10523

Location: Pawling, New York .. •

70-903 50-101

Docket No: 50-290 SNM 871

License No: R~9 ------CX-25 Priority: _1~~~-----Category: (A l ), ___ G __ _

Type of Licensee: Fuel Fabrication and ·Research and Test Reactor Operation

Type of Inspection:Announced Close Out Inspection .

Dates of Inspection: April 9-11 and lS-16, 1974 .

Dates of Previous Inspection: November 26-28, 1973

d..___. ::;:>_r; {) Reporting Inspector.: ~ r?2:.;::::_ .. .. .... -~-· ·-,, \.

~~ip ~~ J~rma~, Radiati~n Specialist

Accompanying Inspectors:--..., :::h~~ ._ ~ • \• .. April 15 & 16, 1974 P. J. Knapp, Senior, Facilities

l_ .. ,L-! • 7 --! Date

'I-,!.'/- 7., Date

Radiolcgical Protection Branch

Date . .

Date

Date

Date Other Accompanying Personnel: None

'-l-1..~ .. 11l Datt

.,----. . /

Reviewed By: ,. ~ ~--- ••• ' ·,' P.J. Knapp, Senior

Facilities Radiological Protection Section • ·r, ~ \

8oua110

•.

...

> •

Enforcement Action

A. Vi'olations

None

B. Safety Items

· None

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

License Action on Previously Identified Enforcement Items

Not applicable

Unusual Occurrences

None

Other Significant Findings

A. Current Findings

Atcor, Incorporated, Peekskill, N.Y. under contract wi.th the licensee, .. I surveyed the licensees entire Pawling, N.Y. plant and carried out all

work necessary to reduce contamination levels to below those specified in the, "Guidelines for Decontamination of Facilities and Equipment Prior To Release For Unrestricted Use or Termination of License for Byproduct, Source or Special Nuclear Material," issued by the Directorate of Licensing. Atcor, Inc. holds AEC Byproduct Material License No. 31-11640-01 under which the w~rk was done. The inspection consisted of a radiation survey to verify contamination levels at the plant fa­cilities as reported by the licensee to the AEC in letters dated March 11 and 13, 1974. •

\.

The existing contamination levels appeared to meet the Directorate of Licensing guidelines for termination of License Nos. Sw.-1-871, R-49 and CX-25. '

B. Status of Previously Reported Unresolved Items

None

Management Interview

1be following individuals attended the management interview at the conclusion of the inspection on April 16, 1974.

t r, A 1 I '

"") II ' . !·, I,...

..

J.E. Anderson, Plant Manager

Atcor

J. Swiger, President

-2-

R. Levesque, Radiation Protection Officer

AEC

P. J, Knapp P. C. Jerman

The inspectors infonned the Gulf and Atcor representatives that all in­strument surveys and resurveys following necessary decontamination indicated that contamination levels met the Directorate of Licensing guidelines for release of the facilities and that wipes taken would have to be counted at RO:I. On April 17, 1974, P. C. Jerman informed J.E. Anderson that tvo wipes taken inside small diameter pipes which penetrated the wall between two rooms, showed excessive alpha contamination. Later that day, J.E. Anderson in­formed RO:I that the contaminated items had been removed for disposal.

I

• I • I

' .

..

REPORT DETAILS

l. Persons Contacted

J.E. Anderson, Gulf, Plant Manager P. Loysen, Gulf, Manager, Regulatory Administration E. C. Holman, Atcor, Vice President, Operations O. Sullivan, Atcor, Project Manager R. Levesque, Atcor, Radiation Protection Ofticer

2. Material Possessed and Processed under the Licenses

a. The Pawling Plutonium Facility operated from 1961 to 1965 under AEC contract. Since 1965, under.AEC license the facility had used Pu and U for fuel development work. Early irl the period, the facil­ity included a Gamma Laboratory for studying irradiated fue.1 material.

· In December, 1972, an explosion occurred in a Pu glove box which caused significant contamination within the'facility. The facility did not resume the manufacture of fuel following the explosion •

. b. The Critical Facility had housed the Pawling Lattice Test Rig since

1960 and the Proof Test Facility since 1967. At the time of this inspection the reactors had been completely dismantled and removed from the facility.

-3. Instrwnentation

a. Survey meters

1) For the alpha surveys, an Eberline PAClSA, (Serial No. 720) was used. It was calibrated by Brookhaven National Laboratory on March 23. 1974. An Eberline Pu source (Serial No. 6786) which is certified to be 128S cpm, 2Pi, wa~ used to check the instru­ment.

2) For beta-gamma surveys two Eberline Hodel E-120 GM Meters, with end window probes containing about 2 m1111grams/cm2 of absorber, were used. The serial numbers were 1269 and 3174. The two me­ters were calibrated against Co-60 gamma radiation by Brookhaven National Laboratory on January 22, 1974. This calibration would be accurate for most beta~gamma measurements, but would not be accurate for measuring beta radiation from uranium. An instru­ment of the same model was calibrated with beta radiation from natural uranium. In this case it was found that the mR/hr read­ing had to be multiplied by a factor of six or slightly'more to obtain true mrad/hr readings from uranium •.

Surveys mnde with the E-120 s during this inspection showed no more than 0.05 ~R/hr.

".'j ~ ') .' • , I ...

' .

(

t .

-4-

b. Counting Instruments·

Wipes taken over 100cm2 surface area were counted for alpha in an Eberline Model SAC~. Calibration was accomplished through the use of a certified Pu-239 source. The wipes were also counted in an Eberline Model LCS-1 with an RD-14 Beta Detector. The instrument was calibrated throu~h the use of a certified·Sr-90 source.

4. Facilities Surveyed

Figure 1 shows the location of the buildings at the Pawling site. De­tailed surveys were conducted in the Critical Facility which housed the test reactors, the PlutoniWII Facility where uranium and plutonium fuels were manufactured and the waste pit which reportedly was never used. The two facilities had contained AEC licensed material. Cursory surveys were conducted in the Remote Assembly.Building, Storage Building, Lodge Engineering Building, Mock-up Building and Multiple Failure Building. A license representative stated that these buildings normally did not contain AEC licensed material. However, the Mock-up Building was used for storage of drums containing contaminated waste resulting from the clean-up of the Plutonium Facility. Also, the employee whose person was contaminated with plutonium during the Dec~~ber, 1973 explosion was decontaminated in the Remdte Assembly Building.

S. Survey Results

a. The Directorate of Licensing guidelines for release. of licensed facilities specify that plutonium total contamination levels may not exceed an average of 500dpm or a maximum of 2500dpm alpha/100 cm2. They also specify that total beta-gamma contamination may not exceed 0.4 mrad/hr at 1cm and removable beta-gamma contamination may not exceed 1000dpm/100c~2.

b. All surveys conducted by the AEC inspectors showed no contamination levels exceeding the guidelines except as follows:

1) One section of the upper level of the east wall in the Gas House of the Plutonium Facility showed an average of about 800dpm/100Cl:12 over 10 square meters. The maximum was 2000dpm. The wail "as cleaned by the licensee's contractor personnel to an average of less than 500dpm alpha and a maximum of about lOOOdprn as measured by the AEC inspectors. ·

· 2) Wipes taken inside five sections of ·1.s inch conduit in the wall between the Pilot Area and the Weld and Load Area in the Plutoniu~ Facility showed 200 to 2l5dpm alpha/100cm2. On ~pril 15. 1974 the inspectors observed that three sections had been removed !roa the wall. A licensee representative informed RO:I by phone on April 17. 1974 that the other two sections ha.d been removed for disposal •

.. , ,q q ...

\.

•.

.. ~ ... •

. .

., '.

., ... . : .. ,_, ..... ....

. ,1. . . . ..

·4-.....

.. ..:· ·::-"·.,. .. :-.:-.:· ~ . ·. ,.

. .: •I' •• .. •,

-: .. • • ~r •: • • • .. . ..

• . • ••

• . .. .. . . .

. . •

..

.. ..

Sketch of Pawling Pla.nt Layout.

• .. · Fi"gure '1 ..

~ 4,. r ..... ~~"'·~­c,,.-40

. " .. . .. .

• .. ' . •. · ..

.. ....... ... . ...• ,. . .. . . . :·J. .. •' . •' .. ..·;·~

.• .. , .. . . .... ··,:~ ... ~: .. " . :,. ....

•

. t ... . . . .. '

. ,\ .

.. . :

•: .­• • • :.1:

, . . . •

P,.Uf0"1III~ l\.' : • FACIUf'f I ·: ~·· ·~

' ii •••••• . .

... ..

·•.

.. . . . , ... . .. • '

• I

,(,'' . --~~- ~~ : .. ,.. . . .,_ .. . . ..,. ... ·"""· . . . . ,. .\

'· . , .. . ' . : .... .. .. . . . . .,,. ' .. . . -~ •• ·.• • ..

FotESr •

"

l· '°'I ' I "; ~ .. r,

·- ., ...

'· ' • •• . . . . •

,. . •, • ':'t· ..:. •• • ..

. ~. ·· . . :' . . . . :t. . ,. ,, ..... . . •

. . .. . " ..

::;:::~:: ::T:~::~:10Ns -~,~~t~t\; ~-. j . • • • . IIZ~IONI .. ~,,~ • . •

· JlO Jnspcction Rcpor t No.: _10_-_9..;.0.;;..;3/ ..... 7_t._:.1_1 ________ _ J>ocket No. :7n-an3

• • Licensee: _____ t._e_ne_r_a_l __ A_to~m~i~c~C~o_._(~G_A~)------~----..,_---....;;...

• • • . License No. :~~1'1-871

P.O. Box 605 I .. .. Prtr:rity: _____ _,

New Haven, Conn. C6503

• ·Location: Pawling, New Yo~k • ---------------------

• . . Type of Licensee: Fuel Fabrication

.. .... ' . .. ..

. .

• Catc&ory: ACl)

-•

. . , .

• Typ~ of Inspection: Announced Close Out/Environmental Independent'Measurements Inspection . , . . . . - . .. . • • Dates. of Inspection :_s_e_'P_t_em_b_e_r __ S_, _1_~_7_4 __________ _

. Dates of Previous Inspection: September 5-6, ,.974

. . . - .

•

.

. .

•

None

.... .

..

• •

. .

•

•

•

·-•

•

•

. Date • .

• •

• . . Date . . •

Date .

Date

. _Other Acco:npany!ng P.e~sonnel: _____________ _

• • I

• ~·

·-Scientist

•

• .. •

. . • . ~ . ~

I '

9001110

J)ate

• J)ate

• i 4 . ,.. . ' :1 . ' ' ~,s·

...

..

·1 •

•• '

' . Enforcement Action

A. Violations

None

B. Safety Items

None

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

Licensee Action on Previously Identified Enforcement Action

Not applicable

Unusual Occurrences

None

Other S_ignificant Findings

A. ~urrent Findings

, .. . . . . . . . . . ,·,

A previous inspection (RO Report No. 70~903/74-01) reviewed the decontamination of the licensee's Pawling, New York facilities by Atcor Incorporated of Peekskill, New York. Part of the Atcor re­port sent to the State of New York (NYS) included questionable information on soil analyses for Pu-238 and Pu-239. Subsequent to discussions with NYS personnel this area was reviewed and inde­pendent soil sampling was perfoI'll'!ed by RO:I personnel. AEC ~naly­ses were performed by Idaho Health Services Laboratory (IHSL),

. . Subsequent to·the licensee's removing some soil immediately adjacent to the Plutonium Facility, certain are~s were resampled. Results were forwarded to the AEC Directorate of Licensing. ·

B, Status of Previously Reported Unresolved Items

None

HanaP,ement Interview

On June 14, 1974 J.P. Stohr and P. Knapp (RO:I) informed P. Loysen (CA) and J, Swiger (Atcor) that:

•

. ~ . '"I • ~ ••• / ~}

------

1

. . -~ I

• •

, . . , -2-

1, The survey assistance provided to Nev York State personnel had indicated no results differing from the previous surveys of AEC licensed activities on April 9-11 and 15-16, 1974. (RO Inspection Report No. 70-903/74-01)

2, The results of soil analyses provided Gulf by Atcor and sent to the State of New York had raised questions as to the accuracy of the measurements.

3. Results from the samples obtained by RO:l on June 14, 1974 would be evaluated and the information ~ould be provided to the Directorate of Licensing for their decision as to the acceptability of the site for license termination and release for unrestricted use. (Details, Paragraph 3)

On June 28, 1974 J. P~ Stohr (RO:I) telephoned P. Loysen (GA) and asked that a split of four of the original soil samples taken by Atcor be sent to IHSL for their analysis. (Details, Paragraph 3)

On July 2S, 1974 J.P. Stohr (RO:I) telephoned P. Loysen (GA) and informed him of the results of the soil samples obtained by the RO:I ~nspectore on June 14, 1974. (Details, Paragraph 3)

On August 1, 1974 J.P. Stohr (RO:l) telep~oned P. Loysen (GA) and. informed him of the results of the soil samples taken originally by Atcor and subsequently analyzed as a split sample-. by IHSL. (Details, Paragraph 3) · -. •

On August 8, 1974 P •. Knapp (RO:I) and G. Hamada (AEC, Directorate of Regulatory Standards) met with P. Loysen (GA) at t~e Pawling Bite and discussed the results of the soil sample analyses and the concept of as-low-as-practicable as might be applied to the Pawling site. The licensee stated that this matter would be evaluated and that·& letter would be submitted to the Directorate of Licensing, AF£ proposing

· certain artions to satisfy this concept as it applied tQ plutonium .concentrations in soil at the fawling site. (Details, Paragraph 4)

, r, , " ···,...., .')

I •

.. . " \

l" !

II°' ..

•• . .

DETAILS

1, Persons Contacted

P. Loysen, (GA), Manager, Regulatory Administration P. Clemens (former Gulf employee) J. Swiger, Atcor President F. Strnisa, tlew York State Senior Industrial Scientist H. Clow, (GA) E. C. Holman, Vice President, Operations, Atcor F. O. Bold, Manager, Health Physics Services, General Atomic Company,

San Diego, California

2. Atcor Soil Samples

In conjunction with their decontamination of the Pawling facilities completed early in calendar year 1974 for (GA) United Nuclear, Atcor had taken soil samples around the site and had them analyzed by Controls for Environmental Pollution, Inc., Sante Fe, New Mexico (CEP). These samples were taken in J~nuary 1974. The results of these samples were submitted by tbe'licensee to the State of New Yor~ (NYS). (These results ranged from normal background levels to a high of 4.47 dpm/gm Pu-238 and 2.57 dpm/gm Pu-239.)

ATepresentative of NYS telephoned RO:I on June 3, 1974 and indicated that the Atcor/CEP results raised some question as to the accept­abillty of the site for release. In addition NYS personnel stated that they planned to- be at the site !or a contamination survey on June 14, 1974. It was agreed between P.O:l and NYSpersonnel that RO:I would also go to the Pawling site to:. · .• ; . a. Assist NYS in survey activ.ities;

. b. Review the Atcor/C~ soil sample analyses with the licensee; c. Take independent soil samples.

3. AEC Onsite Activity on June 14 1 1974

On June 14, 1974 J, P. Stohr and P. 'Knapp (RO:I) assisted the NYS personnel with their surveys. No differences from the previous RO:I inspection (RO Report No. 70-903/74-01) attributable to AEC licensed activities were found.

In addition PO:I :lntpectors discussed with the licensee and Atcor representatives the results of the Atcor/CEP soil sample analyses. . . The R0:1 inspectors stated that these results had been forwarded to the AEC Directorate of Licensing and that there was some ques­tion 86 to the validity of the results (especially for Pu-238) and also the acceptability of·the site for release for unrestricted yse. . "

. )

.. ') ! t. I •

•'

f

I I I

I ·1

•• • -4-

The inspectors obtained independent topsoil samples for analysis by lHSL. The results of these samrtes nre included as Attachment 1. (These results.were communicated to the licensee on July 25, 1974.)

In addition the licensee agreed to contact CEP to determine if portions of the original Atcor soil samples were still available so that aliquots could be sent to IHSL for AEC analysis. This was to be done to help determine the validity of the CEP analyses. (This was later done, and the results of these split samples are included as Attacl,ment 2. This information was subsequently telephoned to ~he licensee on August 1, 1974.)

4. Autust 8, 1974 Meeting at Pawling Site

On August 8, 1974 the following persons met at the Pawling site to review the results of all analyses and discuss possible courses of action by the licensee to satisfy the as-low-as-practicable concept aa applied to plutonium soil concentrations at the Pawling site.

P. Xn.,pp G. Hamada, AEC, Directorate of Regulatory Standard•

' P. Loysen · · P. Clemens (former GA employee) I. C. Holman, Vice President, Operations, Atcor Frank Bold, Manager, Health Physics Services, General Atomic Comp~ny,

San Diego, California

Subsequent to t~is review, the licensee agreed to evaluate the matter and to submit to the Directorate of Licensing a proposed course of action to satisfy the as-low-as-practicable concept for plutonium in.soil concentrations at the Pawling site.

5. AEC Onsite Activity on September 5, 1974

The licensee submitted a letter dated August 12, 1974 from P. Loysen to the Directorate of Licensing describing actions to be takep to reduce plutonium concentrations in certain areas. The actions de­scribed included soil removal.

On September 51 1974 C. Gallina, accompanied by K. Abraham (both RO: I), went· to the Pawling site to review the actions taken by the licensee and to obtain additional soil samples in the effected areas. 'nle inspector found the actions by the licensee were as .described :In the aforementioned letter of August 12. Additional soil samples were obtained. 1Their results are included as Attachment 3. .

• . " ...

AEC Sample

1.

·2,

3

4

•• .

0

• . f •• • • • • ~ • • : I••

'•

ATTACHMENT 1

_!!~ULTS OF AEC (RO:I) SOIL SAMPLING*

.ON JUNE 14 1 1974

Results in dpm/gm dry.soil

I.ocation Pu-238 Pu-239

Driveway to Gas House 0.76-f-0.02 12 .2±.03 of Pu Facility

NE of Multiple.Failure 0.028.±<>,004 0.30!().0l Bldg

North of Gas House o.001+o.003 O.ll;t0,01 Entrance, Pu Facility

Between Pu Facili~y 0. 34±,0. 02 5,3!-0,1 .. and Lake

* Analyses by Idaho Health ~ervices Laboratory

NOTE: Background levels in this area are reported to be approximately 0.04 dpm (Pu-239)/gm of soil and 0.001 dpm (Pu-238)/gm of soil.

ATI'AC11MENT 1

• ... \

I

. . : : .

. .

• • .,

r• • • .

•

ATTACHMENT 2

RESULTS OF AEC ANALYSES* OF SAMPLES SPLIT

WITH CONTROLS FOR ENV IRO?.'MENTAL POLLUTION, INC.

CEP Sample D CEP Analysis

PU-238 Pu-239

1273 0.07.±.0.0S 1.0l-f-0.07

·1282 3.40±().14 1.35.±.0.09

1283 2.29+o.ll 0.56-+-0.06

1284 4.0S-+-0.15 0.49+0.04

* Analyses done by Idaho Health Services Laboratory Units in dpm/gm of soil.

ATTACHMENT 2

•

AEC A1,alysis

Pu-238 Pu-239

0.029+o.004 0.67±.0.02

0.023+o.004 0 .45:!:,0, 02

o. 015.:t.(> ,003 0.21±.0,01

0.023,!<).004 0.42,!0,02 ·

.... .... , t ~. ..., / fi • ti

"

t I I

i .; ·, I

:1

l

,· .. . • . .

·1

... I

• •

ATTACHMENT 3

Information on results of soil samples taken by R0:1 on

September 5, 1974 will be supplied when available •

. \

ATTACHMENT 3

• . ~ ..

I. ,